Snarky legal briefs

[_leareth]

Oh internet law ... you never fail to bring the LULZ.

Talk show host Glenn Beck is pursuing the owner of the domain name glennbeckrapedandmurderedayounggirlin1990.com, charging trademark violations and claiming rights to the domain. He does this by taking his grievance to the arbiration panel at the World Intellectual Property Organisation which

Comments

[sidecharacter]

I started reading it and saw that it just got snarkier and snarkier as I kept going. IT'S AMAZING.

[piratelicker]

i'll just stand here and nod my head knowingly.

[nagaina_ryuuoh]

I have not spent two years studying such things and I STILL think this is hilarious.

[aegwynn_aran]

oh geez. "Only an abejct imbecile would believe that the domain name would have any connection to the Complainant." YOU'RE not an imbecile are you Judge/s?

And it started by saying the complaint FAILED. Is that standard? It seemed completely bizarre. It references Encyclopedia Dramatica too D: God this thing is FANTASTIC.

[_leareth]

To be completely accurate, the people that decide on domain name disputes aren't judges, they're 'arbitrators' who aren't necessarily lawyers and may have other relevant qualifications, and actually the whole system isn't 'legal' at all if you're thinking of the court system *g*

As for being able to say whether complaints fail is standard, actually it is. It's part of the defence *g* the plaintiff submits his/her argument, the defence submits their response and can say, "the plaintiff's argument that blah blah fails to meet the required test of whatever" or something.

But yes. Having Encyclopedia Dramatica in a legal document = hilarious XD

[aegwynn_aran]

Oh I see. Well, I didn't necessarily mean it had to be a judge or some such just whoever was reading it. It came across as "You're not an idiot, right?"

And the fail bit just amused me cause its not like they said it failed to blahblahblah it just said in the opening line that it failed. As if it was just of poor quality of something, I suppose just the way it was read out in context of the other things they say was amusing to me.

[beliael]

I thoroughly enjoyed reading that. It's written with less stuffiness and stilted language than one usually sees (e.g. it's not starting every criticism with "with all due respect" etc) yet it still makes poignant legal points. Very nice.